Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18202442›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2008

Rotavirus vaccines: an overview.

Penelope H Dennehy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 100 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
100citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

100 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 368 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

40 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Penelope H DennehyDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Rhode Island Hospital, 593 Eddy Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA. pdennehy@lifespan.org
Hasbro Children's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rotavirus infection is the most common cause of severe diarrhea disease in infants and young children worldwide and continues to have a major global impact on childhood morbidity and mortality. Vaccination is the only control measure likely to have a significant impact on the incidence of severe dehydrating rotavirus disease. In 1999, a highly efficacious rotavirus vaccine licensed in the United States, RotaShield, was withdrawn from the market after 14 months because of its association with intussusception. Two new live, oral, attenuated rotavirus vaccines were licensed in 2006: the pentavalent bovine-human reassortant vaccine (RotaTeq) and the monovalent human rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix). Both vaccines have demonstrated very good safety and efficacy profiles in large clinical trials in western industrialized countries and in Latin America. Careful surveillance has not revealed any increased risk of intussusception in the vaccinated groups with either vaccine. The new rotavirus vaccines are now introduced for routine use in a number of industrialized and developing countries. These new safe and effective rotavirus vaccines offer the best hope of reducing the toll of acute rotavirus gastroenteritis in both developed and developing countries.

Indexed as

VaccinationAdministration, OralAnimalsCattleChild, PreschoolClinical Trials as TopicEuropeHumansInfantIntussusceptionLatin AmericaRotavirusRotavirus InfectionsRotavirus VaccinesTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesRIX4414 vaccineRotaTeqRotavirus VaccinesVaccines, Attenuated

Identifiers

PMID18202442
PMCPMC2223838
OpenAlexW2169792920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.